Thread

1. xnx · 1790439571 · focus · HN ↗

   Fireship pointed out that the board members gave themselves a generous severance package in the very brief interim, so that was very possibly the whole plan.

   1. tptacek · 1790441715 · focus · HN ↗

      Yeah, if Mullenweg really did control a majority of the voting shares, the previous board are the villains in this story no matter what you think of Mullenweg.

      1. Analemma_ · 1790443090 · focus · HN ↗

         What were they supposed to do? If you’ve been following Mullenweg’s behavior, he’s clearly unstable, and while this is admittedly armchair diagnosis, a lot of his recent writing gives me strong stimulant psychosis vibes. Granted maybe you shouldn’t take a job as a board member at a company where the CEO has 83% of voting shares to begin with, but once you’re there, you still have a fiduciary duty to do what’s best for the company, so IMO they were obligated to at least try and eject him.

         1. onemoresoop · 1790448739 · focus · HN ↗

            Definitely not award themselves very generous severance packages, that sounds fishy as hell regardless of any other factors.

            1. rbanffy · 1790450330 · focus · HN ↗

               If the packages are generous enough, it would create an incentive not to fire them, and, that way, be actually in the best interest of the company.

               If the CEO is indeed insane and incapable of fulfilling his duties, and he still controls 84% of the voting shares, all options are nuclear.

               1. onemoresoop · 1790463484 · focus · HN ↗

                  I could see that logic somewhat if I squint really hard but still, awarding yourself such packages remains very fishy..

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.